Harris v. Sunsong Holdings, Inc.

Citations

• 169 N.E.3d 1030
• 2021 Ohio 1213

Syllabus

The trial court's judgment was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, and it did not err in its application of the law by finding that appellants had misrepresented material facts and concealed material information from appellees in connection with appellees' acquisition of appellants' business. Although certain misrepresentations consisted partly of forecasts and projections regarding the future performance of appellants' business, the misrepresentations also consisted partly of statements regarding past and present facts. The record additionally supported the trial court's findings that appellees justifiably relied on appellants' misrepresentations and that appellants breached their purchase contract with appellees. Furthermore, the trial court did not err by awarding damages in reliance on the testimony of appellees' expert witness, who calculated appellees' damages based upon accepted references and methods. Finally, the trial court did not err by including attorney's fees and prejudgment interest in the award. Judgment affirmed.